Tag: John McCook

The rights to all images in this blog are retained by their original owner.

If you: repeatedly work to end a woman’s marriage, facilitate her rape after calling her a whore, leave her fragile Alzheimer’s afflicted mother alone to drown, facilitate having her children to grow up without a stable family, behave in such a heinous way that her brother flips out trying to stop you and ends up eventually taking his life once his switch has been flipped, repeatedly try to take custody of her children for your own personal gain, and attempt to murder her on more than one occasion – alternating murder attempts with bouts of public humiliation… well! Don’t lose hope! There IS a way to make it up to her in one magical truly painless (for you, that is) moment:

Even for daytime, this was one weak response to Brooke finding out that the woman she believed had finally come to love and respect her had instead intentionally inflicted harm yet again. If I had a nickel for every time the writers have had Brooke fall for that lie, I’d own controlling interest in Microsoft! Granny Stephanie talked idiotic Thomas into lying and allowing his father to believe that he slept with his stepmother and that she was covering up the ‘dirty deed’. Brooke raised Thomas for part of his young life – when he was still a decent and loving human being. She supported him when he had no support from the rest of his family. In the end, Stephanie was able to convince him to turn on his stepmother with very little persuasion needed.

Given the level of betrayal and inflicted damage, it’s disturbing that the writers have chosen to resolve the storyline this way. It feeds the stereotype about the lack of seriousness in daytime writing and production and helps any newbie who attempts to watch the genre understand why so many actors divorce themselves from their daytime past once they make it beyond the fuzzy daytime curtain. The title of the song could have just an easily applied to the impact of the writing on daytime fans, or would if anyone actually believed that daytime writers even LIKED, much less loved or respected their fans. On one hand, I’m sympathetic to the need to end a stinker of a storyline (like the trudge reunion) as quickly as possible. I have to wonder if BnB writers needed to hurriedly wrap the non-reunion storyline to make Steph and Brooke allies in the fight against Taylor, Bill, and Steffy. The problem is that I (and I’m betting most soap fans) don’t need Stephanie to be Brooke’s ally. I would have loved for the writers to have cast Elizabeth Hubbard (ATWT’s Lucinda Walsh) or Melody Thomas Scott (Ex-/Maybe Current Nikki, YnR) as Beth’s wealthy sister who has been estranged from the family since Beth married Stephen Logan — the man she loved first. Aunt Patience Logan could have suffered a recent loss — her own husband dying tragically. With her adult children living their own lives, the loss leads her to realize how alone she is, and how ashamed she feels that she never made peace with her sister, Beth, before she died. It would motivate her make peace with her newfound family, learn the lay of the land, and then go all kick ass on Steph and her trashy crew, knocking them all on their butts. Aunt Patience would help empower her nieces as they’ve never been empowered before. I’d love her to have a vast fortune, big enough to make the Spencer fortune look like spending change and to use it to bring the pain! The BnB doesn’t often promote strong female leads and when it does, they often become psychotic, whether they’re recognized as such (Sheila Carter) or not (Stephanie Douglas Forrester). Aunt Patience would hopefully avoid becoming such a caricature.

Double my pleasure! Make Aunt Patience’s first-born son, a cousin the Logans have never met, a dead ringer for Stormy Logan, assuming it’s even possible for DeVry to return given his busy filming and taping schedule … Is he Stephen’s son or is the resemblance due to their shared maternal lineage? New Storm (Thunder/Rain Cloud/Lightening) could end up falling for Felicia, complicating his mother’s plans to ruin the Forresters once and for all — but make that complicate, not end or deter. I would DELIGHT in watching Aunt Patience, sitting back in the FC CEO’s chair, forcing Stephanie to drop to her knees and beg for the life of her family’s company. I would REVEL in watching Aunt Patience turn over half of FC stock (maybe 60%) to Hope because she has never been involved with a Forrester and would be less least likely to sign over the shares at some point. She could then allow the Forrester family split the remaining stock. Brooke would, of course, manage her daughter’s interests.

If the writers aren’t invested in bringing in new characters, how about forcing Stephanie to sign her 25 percent over to Brooke? Brooke and Ridge would then, as a couple, effectively run FC again.

How about having Brooke and Steph rehash the forgotten forged letter that ended Brooke’s marriage to Eric, only to have Eric overhear it and dump Steph once and for all? (No, REALLY, no going back!) It’s time to bring a woman into Eric’s life that makes him a romantic lead again, instead of having him live out his days as Stephanie’s sock puppet. As a parting shot, Eric could inform Stephanie that she’s been blinded all these years about who the viper in her bosom actually is and then tell her about Taylor sending him to end things with her for good to prove that he wanted to be with her and only her. Stephanie would wake up too late to the realization that Brooke has never been out to destroy her and in trying to destroy Brooke (Hope, and RJ – Bridget and Rick before them) she’s lost the family she claimed to love. Jackie and Eric, Part 2? Wouldn’t that leave Owen free to go back to Bridget and his son? I could stomach that at this point — especially if Bridget and Owen then found out that Nick was the child’s father and had to figure out how to make their relationship work in light of the news.

What if Stephanie really WAS ostracized this time? Why not begin to build a brand new storyline around her? Get Stephanie out of the fashion industry and doing something with her life that benefits others. The current storyline has trivialized her work with the homeless, which was apparently a hobby in between her moments of obsession with Brooke and Brooke’s marriage to Ridge. Rather than another physical illness, which leaves most fans with little sympathy for her) why not have Stephanie go back to her abuse storyline and have her work with a competent psychiatrist to break her bad habits to manipulating, betraying, and controlling? Maybe Dayzee has an abusive ex-boyfriend who shows up and jump starts the storyline. What if Stephanie accidentally kills him during an altercation and tries to hide the evidence of her crime in a real ‘whodunit?’. What if the writers have his father/brother/sister come looking for him, slowly putting the pieces together, and who begins tormenting Stephanie until the truth is revealed. Anything that keeps her from meddling in her adult children’s lives works for me.

Brooke forgave the rape Stephanie facilitated. She forgave Steph for the fake heart attack she used to break up her family. She forgave Stephanie leaving her agitated mother to drown. She forgave Stephanie’s torment of her brother and her siblings. She forgave Stephanie’s various attempts to destroy her children’s happiness. All the while she was maltreated by Stephanie, she’s has repeatedly fought for Steph’s health, her life, and has done everything she could to become ‘true family’ with her. After more than 20 years of torment, closer to 30 years onscreen, at what point does Brooke get to kick Stephanie’s butt, figuratively or literally?

The above “forgiveness scene” was the equivalent of ordering a cup of tea, savoring every bit until the end, where the last taste is bitter. What a pity. I don’t want Brooke to become the vicious and angry pantload Stephanie has always been. I just want a feeling of ‘satisfaction’ when one of the BnB’s “big” storylines is resolved. The level of betrayal Brooke experiences at Stephanie’s hands, the sheer number of TEARS that woman cries, suggests that a much stronger response is needed. Double dating with the man who left you last week, and his parents, on the eve of his would- be wedding, while his psychotic mother warbles out a classic just doesn’t do it for me.

This blog entry is alternately titled, “Killing Soaps Softly… from The Inside” or “Good bye Cruel Soap World”. If you’re not a soap fan – when you read the title you were probably thinking something like this:

The above is the Fugees remake of the Roberta Flack original.

If you’re a soap fan, you were probably thinking this:

Or possibly this:

Thank YOU to the soapoperanetwork.com posters who found and posted the vids. No thanks to the responsible network execs. The network exec/s who came up with that brilliant idea, and approved the above ad (or even that prior Emmy performance) should be GONE from daytime… not just fired, but permanently banned from the entertainment field. Daytime isn’t just dying because of the OJ trial, cable television,syndication, the Internet, etc… it’s being slowly killed from the inside. Add to the above cases the case of The Bold and The Beautiful. You’ve heard me refer to it as my favorite soap in the past. You’ll never hear that comment from me again, I’m sure. Add me as another “Day One” viewer who is finally fed up enough with this show to take if off the ‘occasional view’ list and dump it.

As I’ve stated before, many fans work full time (at home and outside the home) and often want to spend time with entertainment that is ‘relaxing’. We don’t mind entertainment that challenges us and keeps us working when its smart and edgy. LOST was a huge hit because it kept fans guessing and looking toward the future. Entertainment that causes you to work but gives you nothing in return is not worth watching. Fans figured out long ago that Brooke was worth more than a good sex scene and subsequent sex ‘scandals’. It seems clear that the writers haven’t figured that out. There is no future to look toward with this show. We know what the future is… it’s been the same storyline for Brooke for nearly a decade, with an occasional diversion thrown in. She’s twice betrayed her oldest daughter by having slept with not ONE, but TWO of Bridget’s husbands. She has a child with each form son-in-law, one of whom is being raised by Bridget.

The first child Brooke had with a son-in-law is in love with a young man fans once found adorable, Oliver Jones – as played by the adorable Zack Conroy (ex-James Spaulding, The Guiding Light). Anti-Brooke fans joked, when Hope was born, that it would only be a matter of time before Brooke slept with Hope’s lovers, too. That seemed like the most improbable of storylines given the fact that each time the writers had Brooke sleep with one of Bridget’s husbands, the ratings tanked. After the third dalliance (once with SIL Deacon Sharpe, twice with Nick Marone) the writers seemed to finally get it. Brooke + Daughter’s lovers = Disaster. They went through the trouble of having her declared a ‘new woman’, a woman who would never again betray her children. Now this.

Fans, the writers seem to believe, are supposed to forgive Brooke for sleeping with Oliver because despite the fact that his 20 year old body is no where nearly as developed as that of her 50 year old husbands’ body. She couldn’t tell the difference when she had sex with him up a wall, just outside of a room full of teens. He apparently didn’t feel shorter, thinner, or sound different during the tryst.

The room was dark. They were wearing masks. Brooke and Oliver were overcome with passion – Oliver, believing he was having sex with a virginal Hope – who must have at some point told him that she didn’t want her first time to be special, any place and any time would do. She must have also told him she as practicing her moves in the mirror because Oliver didn’t seem to notice that Hope didn’t move like an inexperienced woman. He too, was unable to tell that his partner was older, taller, and didn’t feel the same as the numerous times before when he kissed her. Even if the writers managed to undo this horror of a storyline, they can’t undo their tacit acknowledgement that there is no future for Brooke, and most characters on this show, that doesn’t involve sex with the wrong person, for whatever reason, at any place and time.

Peace to Ms. Katherine Kelly Lang, portrayer of long suffering heroine Brooke Logan, because she (Ronn Moss, Susan Flannery, John McCook, Ashley Jones, and much of the cast) have made this show worth watching during some of its darkest times, but there are limits. I’m not writing, or calling, or begging or pleading. I’m not enraged by the storyline itself, but what it represents. I am also not engaged by thei storyline, I’m just done with the BnB. This show is not my second job. I shouldn’t have to put any effort into enjoying what was once great entertainment.

While the writers, producers, directors, and network executives work hard to make daytime into the huge joke those outside the genre think it is, it’s time for this soap fan to move on. Two of the six soaps (BnB and DAYS) are unwatchable because of the outrageous storylines they tell. The other four are occaasionally passable. Syndication isn’t the problem for daytime, it’s the solution. Fans prefer to watch shows that provide some payoff — and we’re getting less and less of that in daytime.

ROUND THREE, people, ROUND THREE! This will probably be my last blog on this topic for a while, since I’ve neglected my GH, DAYS, and OLTL duties and have yet to reflect on my new love-hate relationship with all three shows.

One of the benefits of posting on soap message boards and blogging is that posting gives you the opportunity to think fully about fans’ reactions to storylines you may think of as basic storylines. Apparently not! In the last BnB blog I posted, I wrote that I’ve been surprised by two concepts 1 – that Stephanie Forrester and Taylor Hamilton Hayes are ‘too moral’ to become involved in a lesbian storyline. 2 – That Taylor and Stephanie are highly moral, at all. The comments below work if you believe that it’s objectively true that Stephanie and Taylor are ‘moral’.

As the debate continues on the official Bold and Beautiful board regarding the speculated possibility of a ‘Staylor’ storyline, I realize just how brilliant the writing for ATWT and GL has been! Before you burn me in effigy, let me qualify that statement – because it clearly requires qualification. The writers of both shows have done something that would not dared have been dreamed of just a couple of decades ago. They’ve established their respective couples (Nuke and Otalia) with at least one partner in the couple serving as their respective shows’ moral centers.

Luke and Noah resisted the temptation to bed-hop as so many others around them had. Noah’s father was a horror of a freak show and Luke’s parents have likely spent as much time sleeping with other people as they have sleeping with one another. Nuke came together not because they were running from anything else, but because they were running TO each other. They took their time getting there (too much time for some fans’ tastes, but they were worth the wait). Nuke brought a patience, kindness, and caring back to the show that had been missing for some time. They also brought back a sense of old-fashioned romance.

The same could be said of Otalia.WOWZA! Their long-awaited admissions of love for one another was nothing short of ‘supernova’ brilliant! The tone was right, the location was right -oddly enough at Gus’ graveside, Liv’s inability to stop herself from saying the words she’s worked so hard to avoid was gut-wrenching… if I wasn’t already sold on them as a couple, I would have been sold at that moment. I haven’t been as pleased with what followed, but more on that at another time. What immediately struck me was Liv’s comment to Nat that she knew that the fact that she loved her was a ‘sin’ in Nat’s religion, but that she couldn’t stop from loving her. Nat treated Liv’s concern about her religious ideas for what it was, no obstacle. (Not everyone interprets religious scriptures the same way; and not everyone believes that love is a sin). Ok, so you’ve seen the follow up eps by now and know that religion will be an issue for the couple in the future. ARGH! I told you that would happen so I’m not surprised, but ARGH is still the best reaction I’m capable of giving at this time.

As for the original point, I think it’s fascinating that Natalia has become the ‘new Maureen Bauer’. She’s the show’s mother hen who makes easy work of finding the good in everyone, who keeps an open door and open heart to everyone around her, and is a friend to anyone in need. I can’t help but believe that the writers will address the ‘religiosity’ aspect of the Otalia storyline, soon, removing the notion of Natalia as a ‘damned soul’ because of her feelings for Olivia.

I think that the way the writing team from each soap handled the matter of establishing their respective couple as part of the show’s moral core (if such a thing exists on a daytime show) was so subtle that I hadn’t thought of it as an overarching theme for the introduction of gay/lesbian couples in the contemporary daytime setting. It could certainly be considered an extension of the introduction of AMC’s Bianca Montgomery who, at almost every age, has served as the keeper of Pine Valley’s collective moral conscience. She became ‘Grandma Mona’s’ spiritual heir.

The Bold and The Beautiful’s Celluloid Closet

If you’ve never seen the documentary ‘The Celluloid Closet’, it’s a MUST VIEW. The documentary is based on Vito Russo’s book of the same name. Clearly Hollywood did a poor job of supporting diversity of any kind in its early history, but like many others, my self-invested interests kept me focused on the nonexistent racial diversity and problematic portrayals of women. This documentary opened my eyes to discrimination across the board, and how easily societal attitudes about sexual minorities have been both shaped and reinforced by the superficial images presented on screen. When I see resistance to the notion of a ‘Staylor’ pairing, there’s a part of me that wonders if the implicit and explicit messages about the ‘morality’ and ‘sexuality’ as polar opposites taps some unexpectedly uncomfortable space when it comes to two characters who’ve presented themselves as the show’s moral standard bearers.

The questions for me is, given how well the formula has worked on other shows, why WOULDN”T Stephanie and Taylor serve as the most likely couple – should the writers decide to introduce sexual diversity to the BnB audience? Wouldn’t this be yet another variation on the theme?

Opening Segment of ‘The Celluloid Closet:

If the ever noble Luke and Noah, spiritual Bianca, and religious Natalia have led the way in asking fans to reconsider their ideas of sexual minorities as ‘immoral’ wherever those feelings exist, wouldn’t it make perfect sense for Stephanie and Taylor to provide the avenue to opening the discussion for viewers on The Bold and the Beautiful? I don’t know how anyone BUT the incredibly skilled Susan Flannery and John McCook could lead this storyline forward (yes, John McCook, not Hunter Tylo). I can see JM’s Eric reacting to his wife, in her ‘golden years’ – as Steph gingerly calls them, deciding not to spend her remaining time supporting him but deciding to live her life with dignity and integrity and being the person she was meant to be.

A tearful and genuine final goodbye to the drama and turmoil she’s lived with Eric? They part as friends, parents, and long ago partners in success before she moves on with her life? And then in walks Taylor. It’s the only thing that makes sense to me. As they stand now, their friendship doesn’t make sense in light of the Stephanie’s extreme attitudes and behaviors regarding Taylor. In the same documentary, author Susie Bright discusses clues that suggest the possible same sex attraction of Mrs Danvers to the character ‘Rebecca’, in the film of the same name. Her comments are in relationship to the clip from the film, featured below (beginning 5:30 in):

“Rebecca” and Mrs. Danvers:

I’ve been asked why I haven’t thought of Stephanie and Brooke as potential partners or supported that notion. Easy. It doesn’t make sense! If we follow the analogy all the way through, then clearly Stephanie is operating in the role of ‘Mrs. Danvers’ to Taylor’s “Rebecca’, with Brooke serving as “the second Mrs. De Winters”. No no, Brooke is no innocent, as is Joan Fontaine’s “the second Mrs. De Winters”, but Brooke truly loves Ridge (who serves as ‘Maxim’ in this analogy). She continues loving him despite never being able to win over the support of the controlling and overly protective Stephanie/Mrs. Danvers. Because of the unspoken love, and unbroken bond, Stephanie’s Danvers shares with Taylor’s ‘Rebecca” – one that not even death breaks, Brooke will always be on the outside. She will never overcome Steph’s/Danvers’ desire to maintain the MYTH of Taylor’s (Rebecca’s) perfection. Brooke will continue to be psychologically tortured by a false image of the perfect woman that Stephanie/Danvers created out of her own unexpressed desires, an image Stephanie/Danvers uses as a weapon against Brooke/2ndDW, though she knows the truth.

Brooke’s 2ndDW will never benefit from having Steph’s Mrs. Danvers spin her misdeeds into something magical and perfectly acceptable in order to hide those sins from those around her as Stephanie/Danvers has done for Taylor/Rebecca. Note how, in both the film and on the BnB, it was most important to maintain the notion of purity for those who were in the dark about Taylor/Rebecca’s true nature, most especially Ridge/Maxim. Steph’s only loyalty is to Taylor. Her passion and compassion are saved for Taylor. Her forgiveness is saved for Taylor. Why is it so unlikely that her truest love is reserved for Taylor? For those who think of Steph and Taylor as mere friends, I just don’t see it. I think the BnB has been writing from it’s own celluloid closet for these two characters for some time, unintentionally or not.

I don’t know how they did it. BnB writers gave us a ton of characters who disliked Rick and had every reason in the world to want to see him taken down. He’s been handed everything on a silver platter and it’s never been enough for him. The more you give him the more he wants. WOW! It makes PERFECT sense that Rick would be the one who sets his family up for a fall and moves on to help his father’s worst enemy take his family’s company down. We were misdirected when the real villain was under our noses the entire time. If a single plot was enough to earn a show an Emmy, the Emmy clearly belongs to the Bold and the Beautiful.

It’s consistent with the show’s history and makes use of a plot point that many may have forgotten. Rick betrayed his father the MINUTE he got back to town. He hid behind a pathological hatred for Ridge and Stephanie to fault them for the Forresters losing the company. Jackie and nick stole the Forrester Creations based on a lie Jackie concocted! Stephanie NEVER shoved Jackie over the banister in the Forrester home, she only defended herself against Jackie’s physical attack on her. The Forresters were faced with saving Stephanie from prison by selling the company, or kissing her good bye (frankly, I would have kissed her good bye).

Rick handed Nick a list of FC employees who would help him make a success of the company he stole (not that they were successful in saving FC from lousy management). He came back and pimped his mother. He came back and treated his grieving sister like a pawn. He came back and ignored his sister’s child’s death.

Rick is a real sociopath! DE-FREAKIN-LICIOUS!

How much more could Eric have loved him? How much more could his parents have given him? Enough is never enough for our Rick, give him and hand and he’ll choke the life out of you and pick your pockets with it. What a evil bastard. What a diabolical plot. Well done, BnB writers! The best in daytime? No, this plot holds it’s own no matter what genre you place it in.

Eric wants Stephanie AND Donna to live with him? PLEASE, say it ain’t so – let’s hope it’s just an ugly rumor. Just a reminder writers, you’ve done this to us before. Thorne asked Macy and Karen to live with him until he could decide which woman he wanted to spend his life with – ultimately choosing Macy.
I’m glad to know that the writers won’t let pesky little things like the changing times, or advances in women’s rights, hold them back. It’s not bad enough that Stephanie has been written as the ‘older woman’ (i.e. woman his age) that Eric goes back to when he can’t have the young chippie he wants, it’s not bad enough that there was the ‘lose weight if you want him to love you’ storyline… no… the writers compound the sin of dragging Stephanie into the depths of soap hell by having her live in the same house as her ex-husband and the woman who crawled into her bed days after she left home to clear her head.

In the immortal words of Hall and Oates, “I can’t go for that, no-o–o, no can do”!

Drop by and try out the NEW Sound and Fury message boards… Talk about soaps, politics, the arts, science, and much more! Get there by clicking the icon below:

Wait, I’m wrong… you CAN! First, Stephanie catches the woman who soiled her marital bed (Donna), fooling around with another man (Owen) – in their shared husband’s (Eric’s) house. Donna is cheating in the very bed that Donna and Eric soiled… Um, YEAH, now that’s just all about the soapy goodness, right there!

So how do the writers top themselves? (Oh, I KNOW, you’re probably thinking, ‘you just can’t top that’… HA! When the BnB is naughty, it’s very VERY naughty! It’s when it’s bad that it sucks… right now? The show is oh so naughty!)

Click HERE! Eric wakes up out of his coma, and without anyone knowing wheels himself down the hall and it now HIS turn to catch Owen and Donna in a dirty clinch. Sometimes… I think the soapgods DO love soapfans. More, writers, I want MORE!

Only a cheat like Donna could think that telling Eric that it’s not what it thinks, and that she cried over him, could make a difference. That chippie is even more obscene than I thought. I don’t know whose misery makes me giggle more, Donna’s or Eric’s. Both are cheaters and both ended up getting a bit of a smackdown… Karma can be a bitch, it’s not just a cliche… I thought soap moments like that were long dead. I guess not!

Equally delicious? The Forrester sibs bouncing Donna out on her ear, giving Owen the heave ho, along with her. I’m sorry, but what kind of fool is Owen, exactly? When a man catches you laying lips on his new bride, the last thing you want to do or say as a ‘defense’ is that his children have been trying to do her in from the moment he went under into his coma… Gee, that explains why you’re in his house, trying to sex up his wife in every bedroom in his house. Shame on you Owen… NOW! End the Owen-Donna mess and bring on Owen and Bridget!

OH, and if the writers would only resolve the baby Jack issue and get that kid back to its biological mother… Taylor? Bridget? ANYONE but Brooke! Anything that binds Nick and Brooke is a BAD thing… it kills off the audience and kills off the show’s ratings.

There are three things you can count on with The Bold and The Beautiful:

1. Anyone close to death (their own or that of someone they care about) will also be incredibly horny and will feel the ‘need’ to have sex before death occurs. It’s post the death-that-never-happen sex that usually produces a child. Fans are still waiting to find out where Taylor’s post-death-that-never-happened child is. She seems to be the only person who has escaped the happening. Or has she?

2. If there’s a dying and/or vulnerable woman, Nick Marone is going to boink her for all he’s worth – which is not much. It’s what he does.

Felicia Forrester? Cancer patient.

Brooke Logan? Suicidal

Taylor Hayes? Recovering from alcohol addiction

Bridget Forrester? Broken heart

Katie Logan? Dying heart transplant patient.

3. This show manages to mangle and mash the concepts of God, character’s sexual behavior, and ‘heavenly blessings’ more than any other soap in the history of daytime. I don’t know what guilt complexes the writers have about the show they bring to air, but I could probably own Trump towers if I had a dollar for each time a character referenced God or some blessed miracle event. God, in the soap world, blesses them with someone else’s husband/wife, supports their betrayals of spouses and children, kills off inconvenient babies in utero, and supports the creation of ‘love children’ with a spouse’s family member. Daytime’s most salacious daytime show is also its most “religious”, and frankly, that creeps me out.

And still, for as much as I hate it, I love the soap too.

Overall, daytime writers and producers continue using the old soap titles, but produce shows that have nothing to do with the shows we remember from the soap’s glory days.

Daytime execs swap out beloved legacy characters in a heartbeat for younger, cheaper-to-pay, fashion models who are using the genre as a ‘stepping stone’. Legacy characters, as the ultimate insult to fans, are sometimes used to introduce the newbies, before disappearing. Not The Bold and The Beautiful – for as much as BnB fans may hate the actions of some of their favorite legacy characters, at least they see them!

This show began with its core four (Susan Flannery’s Stephanie Douglas Forrester, Katherine Kelly Lang’s Brooke Logan (Forrester, Ronn Moss’s Ridge Forrester, John McCook’s Eric Forrester). The core four continue to remain the show’s main attraction.

A for the rest of daytime, I barely recognize most of it. Whatever happened to the old adage that you have to spend money to make it? Fans are tired of stunt casting and stunt reappearances of beloved favorite legacy characters for short periods of time, often during sweeps (a la Genie Francis’ Laura Spencer, who’ll make another brief appearance soon).

Spend the money on the sets – if one more person in Springfield/Peapack moves into Olivia’s hotel, I’m out of the GL fanbase. I can’t take the dark walls and the ‘sameness’ of the rooms. Learn a lesson from the YnR, which still has so many rich sets. Why can’t soaps filmed in the same location share sets (remodeling them as needed whenever they’re used)? Trade off? Do SOMETHING people!

Spend the money on the actors and legacy characters we care about (Where the hell is Scott Bryce’s Craig Montgomery, ATWT?).

Spend the money and hire writers who aren’t bored, and stuck repeating their last best storylines, making daytime far too repetitve.

Stop with the misogyny, the subtle racism, the homophobia.

Stop killing off the characters we grew up loving, and giving us characters our children don’t want to watch.

Stop turning our favorite characters (even the remaining legacy characters) into morons when you want to introduce new characters — even the BnB is guilty of this problem, turning Brooke Logan into a fool for worthless men like Nick Marone, and Deacon Sharpe before him.

We don’t want stunts, explosions, possessions, and other storylines too hokey for even the Sci Fi channel to take seriously. We want emotional investment and big payoffs, events that leave us talking long after the episode has aired.

Stop telling us how great your storylines are, either off screen through the soap mags, or onscreen by using the characters. Write storylines we like and we’ll tell YOU that, by tuning in. Every time you promise something great, and let us down, we stop believing you the next time you make an empty promise.

The Bold and The Beautiful doesn’t get it right, every time, but seeing familiar faces and having characters who are more often, than not, consistent, is almost enough for me.